Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Martial arts/archive 20
 | This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:WikiProject Martial arts. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Leaflet For Wikiproject Martial Arts At Wikimania 2014 (updated version)
Please note: This is an updated version of a previous post that I made.
Hi all,
My name is Adi Khajuria and I am helping out with Wikimania 2014 in London.
One of our initiatives is to create leaflets to increase the discoverability of various wikimedia projects, and showcase the breadth of activity within wikimedia. Any kind of project can have a physical paper leaflet designed - for free - as a tool to help recruit new contributors. These leaflets will be printed at Wikimania 2014, and the designs can be re-used in the future at other events and locations.
This is particularly aimed at highlighting less discoverable but successful projects, e.g:
• Active Wikiprojects: Wikiproject Medicine, WikiProject Video Games, Wikiproject Film
• Tech projects/Tools, which may be looking for either users or developers.
• Less known major projects: Wikinews, Wikidata, Wikivoyage, etc.
• Wiki Loves Parliaments, Wiki Loves Monuments, Wiki Loves ____
• Wikimedia thematic organisations, Wikiwomen’s Collaborative, The Signpost
The deadline for submissions is 1st July 2014
For more information or to sign up for one for your project, go to:
Project leaflets
Adikhajuria (talk) 16:33, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
New articles
I came across 2 new articles--Karate in India and Taekwondo in India. Neither of these seem to have independent reliable sources and I can't really figure out the purpose of these articles. I'd appreciate it if someone would tell me why these articles exist (or why they shouldn't). Papaursa (talk) 02:07, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
- Most of these types of articles have a distinct me too (nationalism) feel to them and in those two cases in particular there is nothing behind them. They shouldn't really exist independently (perhaps parts of a "martial arts in" article) but these types of articles permeate Wikipedia usually as a template fill in this case "Sport in India". The recently created Pakistan Wushu Federation is another example of this. With the lack of references try an AfD.Peter Rehse (talk) 08:51, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
- At least the Pakistan Wushu Federation is an actual organization instead of a vague topic. I will be putting up the two Indian articles for deletion.Mdtemp (talk) 16:28, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
- Most of these types of articles have a distinct me too (nationalism) feel to them and in those two cases in particular there is nothing behind them. They shouldn't really exist independently (perhaps parts of a "martial arts in" article) but these types of articles permeate Wikipedia usually as a template fill in this case "Sport in India". The recently created Pakistan Wushu Federation is another example of this. With the lack of references try an AfD.Peter Rehse (talk) 08:51, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Kendall Yount
I am involved in a deletion discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kendall Yount, where I maintain that junior martial arts titles do not show notability. I base this on previous AfD discussions and comments here at WT:WPMA. If I'm worng about this, I'd appreciate hearing that. Thanks. Papaursa (talk) 03:32, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
- You are not wrong. The article was created by a single purpose account and donuts to dollars there is a close personal relationship here. Juniors are a funny thing - success is often determined by who shows up. That has been recognized at pretty much all sporting projects.Peter Rehse (talk) 08:59, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
We're looking for a photo or two. Much obliged if you can help. Thank you. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:53, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
Oh, here is the commons upload wizard for your convenience: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:UploadWizard
Many thanks, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:55, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
This article has no independent sources. I was thinking of redirecting/merging it into F.C. Porto but that deals exclusively with the football (soccer) team. I'm looking for a way to avoid putting it up for AfD. Papaursa (talk) 16:22, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
- Well one way is to move F.C. Porto to F.C. Porto (football) and merge all the minor (non-notable) subdivisions into one F.C. Porto article (see F.C. Porto (disambiguation). Perhaps an AfD to force the issue.Peter Rehse (talk) 16:40, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
- I started to implement your suggestion, but then I decided it seemed silly for the football club article to be moved to a page specifying it was about the football team. When I get a chance I'll think about dealing with the other pages, most of which seem to lack independent sources. Perhaps a group AfD? Something to think about when I have the time. Papaursa (talk) 19:10, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
- Well one way is to move F.C. Porto to F.C. Porto (football) and merge all the minor (non-notable) subdivisions into one F.C. Porto article (see F.C. Porto (disambiguation). Perhaps an AfD to force the issue.Peter Rehse (talk) 16:40, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
Input requested at Draft:Sword-grip and scabbard-grip
Valid topic? Sourceable? Salvageable? MatthewVanitas (talk) 03:23, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
- None of the above. I would say that this is a minor point of a particular martial art - not general. Wikipedia is not a how to manual.Peter Rehse (talk) 15:37, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
Dear martial arts experts: Is this old AfC submission about a notable person? Should it be kept and improved instead of being deleted as a stale draft? —Anne Delong (talk) 17:09, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
- In my opinion there is nothing particularly notable about his martial arts but the three Emmy awards caught my eye. I could find nothing that confirmed it including the comprehensive lists on wikipedia. I don't know if Emmy awards confer notability. Do they? If they can't be confirmed it should be taken with a load of salt.Peter Rehse (talk) 17:17, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
- Maybe ask at WikiProject Television? —PC-XT+ 02:32, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
- I found out some additional information about his Emmys[1]. He won them all in 2012 for the "Crime Stoppers Case Files" show at the Lower Great Lakes regional emmy award show. Each of them was for "stunt coordinator" and was a shared award with 6 or 7 others (executive director, director, producer, editor, graphics supervisor, director of photography, actor). Since there were 89 categories and this is only one of 20 regional chapters, there are thousands of these awards given out annually. I don't think these awards are sufficient to show notability, nor do I think he meets WP:MANOTE, WP:GNG, or WP:ENT. I think this article can be safely deleted. Papaursa (talk) 20:21, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
- Okay; it is gone now, but can be refunded if so desired in the future. —Anne Delong (talk) 13:32, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
capoeira
Alltheo some would have you believe Africa to be the home of capoeira, however anyone that stays up to date on anthropology, and archeological finds in South America you'll find that the dance ritual with the roda and consistant movement threw acrobatics is used in myan culture predateing the eygiption empire, but african and Japanese Brazilian jujitsu maneuvers made regional. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.251.98.170 (talk) 07:49, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
Notability - "black belt" / Dan ranks
These edits to the notability criteria added a new point caveat to individual notability criteria I'm not sure is appropriate. The majority of MAs don't use dan ranks and many don't use black belts - while this is useful short hand, "Top level" would seem a more appropriate term with "black belt" / Dan ranks as examples. Would there be any objections to this change? --Natet/c 11:18, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
- It reads OK to me since it clearly states or equivalent. I think it was originally inserted because of non-blackbelt BJJ competitions. Some indication of what is meant by highest level is important.Peter Rehse (talk) 11:26, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
- I agree with Peter. I think the "or equivalent" makes it OK. Besides the raft of BJJ underbelt discussions we were getting, we were also seeing 8 and 10 year old beginners claiming notability for winning karate championships. I think "top level" might be too ambiguous for non-MA editors since I can see instances where people might claim notability based on winning a children's or beginners division at a major event. Papaursa (talk) 19:04, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
Dear martial arts experts: Is this old AfC submission about a notable fighter, or should it be deleted as a stale draft? —Anne Delong (talk) 02:15, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
- Hi Anne - she already has an article.Peter Rehse (talk) 13:13, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
- Oh, dear, sorry, Peter Rehse. I must have spelled her name wrong when I did the search. It's too bad the work had to be done over again. Do you agree that there's nothing much in the draft that isn't already covered in the mainspace article, and so the draft can be deleted? —Anne Delong (talk) 14:49, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
- Sorry Anne I should have been clearer. Delete the draft - the name space article covers all and is more up to date.Peter Rehse (talk) 14:58, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
- Oh, dear, sorry, Peter Rehse. I must have spelled her name wrong when I did the search. It's too bad the work had to be done over again. Do you agree that there's nothing much in the draft that isn't already covered in the mainspace article, and so the draft can be deleted? —Anne Delong (talk) 14:49, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
Can you please comment on the notability of this guy and the sourcing of the standings from a martial arts perspective? The article was created by a paid editor and so could well suffer from OR problems. I can tell that the subject doesn't meet WP:PROF but I suspect they may be notable due to the Jiu-Jitsu. Thanks SmartSE (talk) 23:22, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
- My research showed he won 2 adult black belt medals (1 bronze, 1 silver) at the IBJJF world championships so I would say he would meet the notability standards for martial artists. Papaursa (talk) 00:28, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Help needed at Draft:Judo in Romania
This draft is from an IP, which means high likelihood they won't hang around to fix it if it gets declined. This is clearly a valid topic, so if anyone can take a moment to add at least enough citations to get it published, that'd be great. Thanks! MatthewVanitas (talk) 04:00, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
This is an elementary school whose chief claim to fame appears to be its karate team. I don't think they're notable, but I'd like some additional opinions. There's a lot of sources, but they don't seem like significant coverage to me because they seem to be mainly lists of kids winning awards and that doesn't seem to set them apart from most elementary schools.Mdtemp (talk) 18:36, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- Schools have their own set of rules on wikipedia - I don't think the martial arts section has any relevance to the school being kept or not.Peter Rehse (talk) 18:53, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- You might try posting at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Schools or Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools/Help. None of these look particularly active, so you might wait a while for a response. Mdtemp, I'd be inclined to agree with you. However, if you try to delete this subject I would expect a fight. I remember attempts to delete pre teen beginning karate students from this school (as well as their karate team and teacher) that were met with stiff resistance. For examples you can check these AfD discussions: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Razhel Mengullo, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Razhel Gee Mengullo, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Razhel Gee Mengullo (2nd nomination), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Guanzon, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Seth Jego Balibalos, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aaron Lubrico, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/JJS Karate Dojo, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mengullo, Randy, and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Randy Mengullo. Papaursa (talk) 19:15, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
- Peter and Papaursa, thanks for your suggestions. I've posted my question there where it says elementary schools are usually not notable. Papaursa, I took a quick look at those deletion discussions and I'm not sure I want the hassle.Mdtemp (talk) 18:14, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
- You might try posting at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Schools or Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools/Help. None of these look particularly active, so you might wait a while for a response. Mdtemp, I'd be inclined to agree with you. However, if you try to delete this subject I would expect a fight. I remember attempts to delete pre teen beginning karate students from this school (as well as their karate team and teacher) that were met with stiff resistance. For examples you can check these AfD discussions: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Razhel Mengullo, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Razhel Gee Mengullo, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Razhel Gee Mengullo (2nd nomination), Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Guanzon, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Seth Jego Balibalos, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aaron Lubrico, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/JJS Karate Dojo, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mengullo, Randy, and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Randy Mengullo. Papaursa (talk) 19:15, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
Names of students and teachers in Martial Artist infobox
The guidelines for infoboxes clearly state that long lists of names are contrary to the purpose of infoboxes. However, nowhere does it state that inclusion of information is valid only if it links to other Wikipedia articles. Specifically, the Martial Artist infobox has a "Notable Students" parameter. As long as the list does not run on very long, I think the inclusion of students and teachers who do not have their own Wikipedia articles should be allowed--for example, the deshi of a high-ranking martial artist. For example, "Takafumi Takeno" was recently removed from the infobox of Gozo Shioda, although he is currently the top shihan in the Yoshinkan organization. The fact that he does not have a Wikipedia article is an accident and not a reflection of his lack of notability. Having an excessively rule-bound interpretation of notability does not improve the information in Wikipedia, it dumbs it down.KyotoKenshu (talk) 18:24, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
- Well considering I was the one who deleted them let me explain. The names removed did not have their own articles or an associated reference. How they can be differentiated from every other list of names that permeates martial arts articles. If the person is notable there should be either a reference that shows the connection or their own article. Please remember people who may be notable to Yoshinkan may not be notable to the wikipedia community at large and by way of argument high rank does not confer notability.Peter Rehse (talk) 18:34, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
- Yes, I understand why you made the deletions, but I disagree with your criterion. In an encyclopedia, when people open it up to discover all the X that are Y, they assume they will get a complete listing--that is the nature of an encyclopedia. It may be that certain types of information are not included due to space considerations, etc. However, people do not expect to look up the X that are Y and get a partial list of some X that are Y. Wikipedia is not written for "the Wikipedia community," it's written for the world at large. So, when "Notability" is used within Wikipedia's guidelines as jargon with a narrow, internally-defined meaning, that's fine. But when "notable" is part of a published article, it needs to meet users' expectations ("users", again, meaning the world at large, not Wikipedia contributors). I guarantee that if you took a person off the street and explained who Gozo Shioda is and who is Takafumi Takeno is, they would assume it's a mistake that he's not listed as a "notable student" of Gozo Shioda. So, while I can see why Takafumi Takeno might not have his own article, I think when lists of things appear on Wikipedia, inclusion according to the standard of Notability is a mistake. As I mentioned above, the definition of this parameter in the Infobox template does not say that inclusion in the list requires Notability. Anyhow, I know enough about Wikipedia and Wikipedia editors to know I'm not going to win this argument unless someone else weighs in with their opinion.KyotoKenshu (talk) 07:43, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
- I've seen this reasoning used by other projects--lists can only contain subjects with WP articles. This may not be "right" but it is reasonable. I understand your argument, but I've seen long lists with few of them being WP notable. The existing method takes away any subjectivity.Mdtemp (talk) 19:11, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
- Yes, I understand why you made the deletions, but I disagree with your criterion. In an encyclopedia, when people open it up to discover all the X that are Y, they assume they will get a complete listing--that is the nature of an encyclopedia. It may be that certain types of information are not included due to space considerations, etc. However, people do not expect to look up the X that are Y and get a partial list of some X that are Y. Wikipedia is not written for "the Wikipedia community," it's written for the world at large. So, when "Notability" is used within Wikipedia's guidelines as jargon with a narrow, internally-defined meaning, that's fine. But when "notable" is part of a published article, it needs to meet users' expectations ("users", again, meaning the world at large, not Wikipedia contributors). I guarantee that if you took a person off the street and explained who Gozo Shioda is and who is Takafumi Takeno is, they would assume it's a mistake that he's not listed as a "notable student" of Gozo Shioda. So, while I can see why Takafumi Takeno might not have his own article, I think when lists of things appear on Wikipedia, inclusion according to the standard of Notability is a mistake. As I mentioned above, the definition of this parameter in the Infobox template does not say that inclusion in the list requires Notability. Anyhow, I know enough about Wikipedia and Wikipedia editors to know I'm not going to win this argument unless someone else weighs in with their opinion.KyotoKenshu (talk) 07:43, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
Commonwealth games judoka notability
A number of one sentence articles have been created recently about English judoka who won medals (mainly bronze, some silver) at the 2014 Commonwealth Games. Is this enough to show notability? I don't think so, but I wanted to get some other opinions.Mdtemp (talk) 21:01, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
- I've seen these and a number of other similar articles. My gut feeling is that if they have medaled in major regional events such as the Commonwealth games than they are notable. Frankly if participation in the Olympics alone means you are notable - it is not too much a stretch to say these are notable. Other regional games that would rate would be Pan-American and Asian games. These regional games are far larger than lets say BJJ world championships where medalling is considered notable.Peter Rehse (talk) 21:24, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
- It doesn't seem clear to me, although my impression is that 'participation in competitions at the highest level' seems not to be contested. Wikipedia:Notability (sports)#Basic criteria says that "sports figures are likely to meet Wikipedia's basic standards of inclusion if they have, for example, participated in a major international amateur or professional competition at the highest level (such as the Olympics)" (my emphasis), and that seems to indicate that participation is not, in itself, sufficient to establish notability ... more of a strong correlation rather than an unequivocal causal link. Janggeom (talk) 12:58, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
- Interesting point - I never really liked the idea that participation in the Olympics is automatically considered notable. But I do think Olympics is not the only major international even where medalling (sp?) does make you notable.Peter Rehse (talk) 13:04, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
- One problem I had is the size of this event. Some divisions had only 7 competitors which means a person made it to the semi-finals (and hence a bronze medal) without winning a fight. I know WP:MANOTE talks about multiple medals, not just one. However, I suspect putting any of them up for deletion would lead to a bitter argument that I'm not up for right now. I do agree that I've always thought mere Olympic participation was too low a bar, but that's another fight I don't need.Mdtemp (talk) 18:39, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
- Although WP:MANOTE does say "repeated medalist" I'm inclined to make exceptions--world championships being my primary example. Before the boxing criteria were expanded, I remember a heated deletion discussion about a boxer who won a bronze medal by winning one fight at one of the Commonwealth games. That discussion led to a 50/50 split between Commonwealth editors and U.S. editors. My personal thinking, reflecting no WP policy, is that getting a medal in an event where you didn't win any fights (or even just one) isn't enough to show notability.
- One problem I had is the size of this event. Some divisions had only 7 competitors which means a person made it to the semi-finals (and hence a bronze medal) without winning a fight. I know WP:MANOTE talks about multiple medals, not just one. However, I suspect putting any of them up for deletion would lead to a bitter argument that I'm not up for right now. I do agree that I've always thought mere Olympic participation was too low a bar, but that's another fight I don't need.Mdtemp (talk) 18:39, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
- Interesting point - I never really liked the idea that participation in the Olympics is automatically considered notable. But I do think Olympics is not the only major international even where medalling (sp?) does make you notable.Peter Rehse (talk) 13:04, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
- It doesn't seem clear to me, although my impression is that 'participation in competitions at the highest level' seems not to be contested. Wikipedia:Notability (sports)#Basic criteria says that "sports figures are likely to meet Wikipedia's basic standards of inclusion if they have, for example, participated in a major international amateur or professional competition at the highest level (such as the Olympics)" (my emphasis), and that seems to indicate that participation is not, in itself, sufficient to establish notability ... more of a strong correlation rather than an unequivocal causal link. Janggeom (talk) 12:58, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
Martial artist category
I have another question. I see lots of actors, and actresses, and others who are listed in the martial artist category--some of them aren't even black belts. That seems wrong to me. If I had an article I wouldn't claim to be a basketball player just because I play pick-up basketball. It seems like to be listed in a category you should either need to earn money at it, be full time, or have accomplished something significant. Is there any criteria about this? Mdtemp (talk) 18:44, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
- There's a paragraph indicating that the scope of a category may be elucidated on the category page itself. Looking at the relevant category page shows only a brief, general description that sets potential scope to a very broad level. I'd agree that the scope could be narrowed. Janggeom (talk) 03:13, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
- Mdtemp brings up a good point. Categorizing someone as an actor because he once did some community theater would be another good example. Building on Mdtemp's comment, what about this statement? "This category pertains to individuals who either make a living by martial arts (fighting systems or codified practices of combat) or meet WP:MANOTE." I'm sure this can be improved, but I thought I'd put out a suggestion. Papaursa (talk) 23:02, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
- "Make a living by martial arts" seems a bit vague. How about "whose primary source of income is martial arts"?Mdtemp (talk) 16:59, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
- Hard to come up with something better but that sounds a little bit too restrictive. I would consider it valid if at some point in their career the martial arts identified who they were - not necessary meeting WP:MANOTE. Oh and yes - some actress that got a red belt in Fooyi Ryu - Not.Peter Rehse (talk) 17:22, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
- It does sound restrictive, but that's true of other professions as well--see my original example and Papaursa's. I'm sure Hollywood A-listers would be offended if I told them we were the same because I'd done a school play and LeBron wouldn't say we're on the same level (or category) as basketball players. Even having a black belt I wouldn't say is sufficient given the number of McDojos and the fact that it really just means you're an advanced beginner. There's a reason many instructors tell their new black belts "Now I can begin to teach you martial arts."Mdtemp (talk) 17:38, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
- I think that 'primary source of income from martial arts' could be moderately correlated with being a 'notable martial artist,' but I am wondering if there are might be any notable martial artists who earned their primary income by doing something else. I can't think of an example just now, but Gichin Funakoshi came to mind, since he was a schoolteacher by trade. (Note that I am not citing him as an example; just indicating my line of thought.) Looking in the other direction, I can think of several people who earn their primary income from martial arts, but would not be notable martial artists. On a different note, while many organisations or systems might use a black belt to denote 'advanced beginner' status, not all do (as far as I'm aware, Brazilian jiu-jitsu is an example). Perhaps a criterion based on time actively training/teaching might be more objective and slightly more consistent than trying to use 'black belt'? Just a few thoughts. Janggeom (talk) 06:45, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
- I interpret Mdtemp's comment to mean that a black belt alone wouldn't be enough to show someone is a martial artist, but much less a notable one. Given the number of 8 year old black belts, I'd be inclined to agree. This discussion isn't about notability as a martial artist, but rather about being categorized as a martial artist. I believe that's an important distinction. Making your living as a martial artist wouldn't make you notable, any more than in any other profession, but I think Mdtemp is saying it would be enough to be included in the category of martial artists if you're already notable for something. Papaursa (talk) 00:36, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
- Agreed; the discussion is about the category rather than notability. I was adding a few general thoughts, but re-reading what I posted, I can see that "notability" crept in there more than I'd intended it to. Janggeom (talk) 12:37, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
- I interpret Mdtemp's comment to mean that a black belt alone wouldn't be enough to show someone is a martial artist, but much less a notable one. Given the number of 8 year old black belts, I'd be inclined to agree. This discussion isn't about notability as a martial artist, but rather about being categorized as a martial artist. I believe that's an important distinction. Making your living as a martial artist wouldn't make you notable, any more than in any other profession, but I think Mdtemp is saying it would be enough to be included in the category of martial artists if you're already notable for something. Papaursa (talk) 00:36, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
- I think that 'primary source of income from martial arts' could be moderately correlated with being a 'notable martial artist,' but I am wondering if there are might be any notable martial artists who earned their primary income by doing something else. I can't think of an example just now, but Gichin Funakoshi came to mind, since he was a schoolteacher by trade. (Note that I am not citing him as an example; just indicating my line of thought.) Looking in the other direction, I can think of several people who earn their primary income from martial arts, but would not be notable martial artists. On a different note, while many organisations or systems might use a black belt to denote 'advanced beginner' status, not all do (as far as I'm aware, Brazilian jiu-jitsu is an example). Perhaps a criterion based on time actively training/teaching might be more objective and slightly more consistent than trying to use 'black belt'? Just a few thoughts. Janggeom (talk) 06:45, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
- It does sound restrictive, but that's true of other professions as well--see my original example and Papaursa's. I'm sure Hollywood A-listers would be offended if I told them we were the same because I'd done a school play and LeBron wouldn't say we're on the same level (or category) as basketball players. Even having a black belt I wouldn't say is sufficient given the number of McDojos and the fact that it really just means you're an advanced beginner. There's a reason many instructors tell their new black belts "Now I can begin to teach you martial arts."Mdtemp (talk) 17:38, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
- Hard to come up with something better but that sounds a little bit too restrictive. I would consider it valid if at some point in their career the martial arts identified who they were - not necessary meeting WP:MANOTE. Oh and yes - some actress that got a red belt in Fooyi Ryu - Not.Peter Rehse (talk) 17:22, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
- "Make a living by martial arts" seems a bit vague. How about "whose primary source of income is martial arts"?Mdtemp (talk) 16:59, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
- Mdtemp brings up a good point. Categorizing someone as an actor because he once did some community theater would be another good example. Building on Mdtemp's comment, what about this statement? "This category pertains to individuals who either make a living by martial arts (fighting systems or codified practices of combat) or meet WP:MANOTE." I'm sure this can be improved, but I thought I'd put out a suggestion. Papaursa (talk) 23:02, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
- Here is what I see as our current definition for the category of martial artist--"This category pertains to individuals whose primary source of income is derived through martial arts (fighting systems or codified practices of combat) or who meet WP:MANOTE." Additional comments are welcome. Papaursa (talk) 19:10, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
- I would go for significant rather than primary or some such variation.Peter Rehse (talk) 19:14, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
- Sounds good, Papaursa; suggested minor rephrasing (including Peter Rehse's suggestion) to put primary emphasis on the notability criteria: "This category pertains to individuals who meet WP:MANOTE, or who practise and derive a significant proportion of their income through martial arts (fighting systems or codified combat practices)." Janggeom (talk) 05:24, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
- I like the emphasis on primary because it's clearer than "significant", but I'll go with whatever the consensus is. I do like Janggeom's phrasing better than Papaursa's. Can/should we add something to make it clear this applies to subgroups like karateka or taekwondo practioners? Perhaps something like "This definition also applies to subgroups (e.g., karateka or taekwondo practioners)." Mdtemp (talk) 18:59, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
- The potential catch I can see with "primary" is that it might then exclude anyone who happens to earn more from doing things other than martial arts (which I expect doesn't figure all that highly in the list of professions with the greatest earning potential), yet does earn a significant proportion of his/her income from martial arts. As above, I can't think of an example just now, so this is a hypothetical situation. I agree that "significant" is not particularly clear, if we are looking for a detailed set of criteria. Janggeom (talk) 14:10, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
- How's this: "This category pertains to individuals who meet WP:MANOTE, or who practice and derive a significant proportion of their income directly through martial arts (fighting systems or codified combat practices). This definition also applies to subgroups (e.g., karateka, taekwondo practioners, or martial artists by nationality)."Mdtemp (talk) 18:37, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
- That looks good to me. Janggeom (talk) 11:21, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
- It's OK with me. It's certainly better than the current statement. Papaursa (talk) 21:49, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
- That looks good to me. Janggeom (talk) 11:21, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
- How's this: "This category pertains to individuals who meet WP:MANOTE, or who practice and derive a significant proportion of their income directly through martial arts (fighting systems or codified combat practices). This definition also applies to subgroups (e.g., karateka, taekwondo practioners, or martial artists by nationality)."Mdtemp (talk) 18:37, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
- The potential catch I can see with "primary" is that it might then exclude anyone who happens to earn more from doing things other than martial arts (which I expect doesn't figure all that highly in the list of professions with the greatest earning potential), yet does earn a significant proportion of his/her income from martial arts. As above, I can't think of an example just now, so this is a hypothetical situation. I agree that "significant" is not particularly clear, if we are looking for a detailed set of criteria. Janggeom (talk) 14:10, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
- I like the emphasis on primary because it's clearer than "significant", but I'll go with whatever the consensus is. I do like Janggeom's phrasing better than Papaursa's. Can/should we add something to make it clear this applies to subgroups like karateka or taekwondo practioners? Perhaps something like "This definition also applies to subgroups (e.g., karateka or taekwondo practioners)." Mdtemp (talk) 18:59, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
- Upon seeing no more comments on this topic, I will update this definition. Papaursa (talk) 17:47, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
Comment on the WikiProject X proposal
Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
Dear martial arts experts: Is this old AfC submission about a notable fighter? There appear to be references available on the internet, but I have no idea which ones may be reliable or which accomplishments are notable in this field. —Anne Delong (talk) 14:15, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
- Does not meet WP:KICK and with the possible exception of world champion Savate all titles are minor. With the absences of references I would say this should not see the light of day.Peter Rehse (talk) 15:45, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks, Peter Rehse, I've deleted in under db-g13, but it can be "refunded" and expanded if there are ever notable wins or extensive news coverage in the future. —Anne Delong (talk) 22:39, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
All I'm trying to get, is for someone who knows, to please tell me what the meaning of the name, "Fukyugata" means, in Japanese or Okinawan or whatever. I can easily find what all the other kata names mean. I know it's a kihon kata, I just want to know
Hello, I just want to find out what the actual meaning of the name "Fukyugata" means, as in the Fukyugatas of Matsubayashi Ryu Karate, and of Seibukan, and maybe some other styles. I know it's a kihon -or 'basic' kata. I can find what every other kata name means as far as I can tell. I know the definitions of other kihon kata. Gekisai kata means, "smashing/breaking"; Taikyoku means, "Great Cause"; The Pinans or Heians, mean "Peace & Tranquility".... and so on. Why after searching online several times now, and spending several hours, for a few weeks, can't I find a simple answer(?) - or any answer to something that one would think would be somewhat interesting to know, especially since all the other kata meanings can be found fairly easily? --- Just Wondering, and very frustrated at the apparent lack of any good leads. I'm pretty sure that the "-gata" part on the end means "kata", but what does the first part mean? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.189.208.26 (talk) 03:54, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
- @75.189.208.26: 普及型 (Fukyū-gata) could be commonly translated as "popular type". Bellerophon talk to me 15:49, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
Surely Lana Stefanac deserves one?
Lana Stefanac being a winner of multiple BJJ tournaments deserves an article.?
Is Belgian Championships Charleroi notable?
Belgian Championships Charleroi is it a notable competition as I wanna write an article about Cindy Dandois as she came third in the championship [2]. Dwanyewest (talk) 02:51, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
- My google search on "Belgian Championships Charleroi" only got 4 hits, so it doesn't look promising. Plus all of the hits are in individual lists of results, so there's nothing to show significant coverage. When I look at judoinside it also doesn't look like Cindy Dandois meets WP:MANOTE. Mdtemp (talk) 19:08, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
- My search didn't find any significant coverage of the tournament. As far as Cindy Dandois goes, she has her first top tier MMA fight coming up soon. Right now creating an article would fall under TOOSOON since she doesn't meet any notability criteria. I would say she doesn't qualify as a notable judoka, but in the future she may qualify as a notable MMA fighter. Papaursa (talk) 21:47, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
- My google search on "Belgian Championships Charleroi" only got 4 hits, so it doesn't look promising. Plus all of the hits are in individual lists of results, so there's nothing to show significant coverage. When I look at judoinside it also doesn't look like Cindy Dandois meets WP:MANOTE. Mdtemp (talk) 19:08, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
Are these guys notable?
Is Seiji Nishimura [3] and Bren Foster notable? Dwanyewest (talk) 18:51, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
- I believe Nishimura is notable. Between what you have as his record and my finding him on the cover of the March 2003 issue of Martial Art magazine, I believe you're off to a good start. On the other hand, I found nothing to show Bren Foster is a notable martial artist. Papaursa (talk) 19:31, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
- I was tempted on doing Kate Da Silva but was unsure if her BJJ experience was considered top class. [4] Dwanyewest (talk) 19:00, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
- I can find no record of her competing at a major IBJJF or ADCC event, much less winning. Most of her BJJ grappling appears to have not been done as a black belt. I also searched under her maiden name, but was no more successful. Papaursa (talk) 17:45, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
- I was tempted on doing Kate Da Silva but was unsure if her BJJ experience was considered top class. [4] Dwanyewest (talk) 19:00, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
Is there a place where I can redirect this article? I don't think it has the coverage required to be an article by itself. If you think I'm wrong about that, please let me know.Mdtemp (talk) 18:41, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
- Chinese martial arts#Forms, possibly? Just a suggestion. Janggeom (talk) 13:30, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
- That article doesn't describe forms and mentions just a few--this isn't one of them. I think I'll just put it up for AfD and see what happens.Mdtemp (talk) 18:10, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
- Changed my mind. I found a spot to redirect it--Changquan#Hand forms.Mdtemp (talk) 18:26, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
- That article doesn't describe forms and mentions just a few--this isn't one of them. I think I'll just put it up for AfD and see what happens.Mdtemp (talk) 18:10, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
Which Karate competitions are notable?
Is winning a medal at a World Karate Championships enough to make you a notable candidate for an article and if so which other Karate tournaments are considered notable? Dwanyewest (talk) 12:08, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
- I would say that, except for the Olympics, the WKF world championships are probably the most significant karate tournaments. I tend to discount the kata portions of the tournament, but the kumite divisions certainly count as major. I don't think any other tournament is in the same league or carries the same significance, although the Irish Open is probably the largest event in terms of competitors. Papaursa (talk) 01:41, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
But what about stuff like European Karate Championships, Asian Karate Championships, Commonwealth Karate Championships do they count? Also does Karate at the Asian Games or Karate at the Pan American Games also count Papaursa (talk)? . Dwanyewest (talk) 02:39, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
- I would say that winning a kumite medal at the WKF world championships would be enough to convince me of notability. I don't think that winning a medal at any of the other events you listed is enough, on its own, to show notability. However, winning medals at several of those events (such as in different years) seems like it would be enough to meet WP:MANOTE. Papaursa (talk) 00:57, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
I say this Papaursa (talk) because there are ALOT of bad karateka articles such as Koji Ogata (karateka) where winning the JKA All-Japan Male Champions - Kumite or JKA World Champions - Male Kumite makes Japanese karateka notable or French karateka like Marc Pyrée,Emmanuel Pinda which little or no sourcing at all. I would like a more definite structure for what makes a Karateka notable as I can't see Karate being part of the Olympics before 2024 or 2028. I also believe Vic Charles] [5] is notable as he was the first Brit to win a MBE for services to Karate. Also what about Wayne Otto is a multiple winner and did win an OBE [6]. Dwanyewest (talk) 23:12, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
- Just because there is an article on wikipedia does not mean there should be. A while ago someone created Stubs for all the JKA All-Japan champions from basically one source. I don't think any of them were notable but left it to be dealt with by someone else.Peter Rehse (talk) 07:40, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
- I looked it up and I see that many people awarded the OBE and MBE have been deleted because that's not considered enough to automatically show encyclopedic notability. I also don't think team medals are sufficient to show notability because I've seen a number of instances where someone got a medal in a team event even though they never won a single match individually. In some cases, they didn't even compete but were simply on the roster. As far as notability goes, I think WP:MANOTE does a pretty good job of defining it. The track record of martial arts AfD discussions shows that there are plenty of existing articles that probably shouldn't be there. These comments are general and don't necessarily refer to the individuals Dwaynewest mentioned above because I didn't specifically research them. Papaursa (talk) 17:26, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
- I don't believe that various "World Games" show notability because they tend to lack the status of other competitions. For example, in a number of the martial arts, they have a lot of "World Cup" events annually--it's a name, not a true indicator of significance. Papaursa (talk) 03:28, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
Finding records on past Karate tournaments?
If the European Karate Championships is a notable competition does anyone know how to find information on past Karate tournaments as it seem to be niche thing? such as 1966 European Karate Championships and 2007 European Karate Championships. Dwanyewest (talk) 03:58, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
I found information for the last 10 years does anyone have information on the 1990;s and 1980s tournaments.[7] Dwanyewest (talk) 01:49, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
Not sure if he even deserves one
Should Tatsuo Suzuki (martial artist) even get an article in English [8][9][10]Dwanyewest (talk) 04:26, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
Request for Comment
There is a Request for Comment about "Chronological Summaries of the Olympics" and you're invited! Becky Sayles (talk) 07:40, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
Legit?
I'm absolutely not qualified to judge the article on Shinsenkai Karate. But I'm not impressed by the fact that there are 0 references, or that it's called a "neologism". Is this something that exists outside of the mind of the person who posted the page? DS (talk) 14:43, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
- There is a lot wrong with the article and as far as I can tell it is the name of a single club. There is nothing in the article which supports notability, it was written by a SPA, and is a prime candidate for deletion.Peter Rehse (talk) 15:14, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
- I have put it up for an AfD discussion. It probably could have been put up for speedy deletion, but I figured I'd give people a chance to comment on it. Papaursa (talk) 17:26, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
I'm looking for opinions on whether or not this topic is notable. Thanks.Mdtemp (talk) 20:28, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
- I've put it up for AFD. That should generate some discussion.Mdtemp (talk) 19:53, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
I don't know how to fix this
I have being using the French wikipedia to create European Karate Championships articles but one thing I noticed was that on the French version of European Karate Federation it should be fr:Fédération européenne de karaté instead of fr:Fédération mondiale de karaté I tried correcting but to no avail can someone else try and fix it. Dwanyewest (talk) 01:21, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
- They are both about the same subject with the Mondiale slightly more detailed. Best way is to create a redirect from the latter to the former since the Fédération européenne de karaté is the correct name, and copy the more interesting bits over. I don't know the French versions command for REDIRECT.Peter Rehse (talk) 08:51, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
Is this a good source?
I was wondering is Karate by Jesse considered a good source? [11]. Dwanyewest (talk) 02:54, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
- This is just somebody's karate blog so it's not a reliable source.Mdtemp (talk) 19:07, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
- I agree completely with Mdtemp. It's a complete bust as a reliable source. Papaursa (talk) 19:20, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
- Couldn't see how I would be a RS. Niteshift36 (talk) 19:34, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
- I agree completely with Mdtemp. It's a complete bust as a reliable source. Papaursa (talk) 19:20, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
Move request for T'ai chi ch'uan
I am proposing a move to the more common name of Tai chi. The discussion is here: Talk:T'ai_chi_ch'uan#Requested_move_18_November_2014. Cheers, --Tom (LT) (talk) 22:13, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
Need more help regarding Karate articles
I have created new Karate articles such as 1966 European Karate Championships and 1968 European Karate Championships and could do with some help with anyone who could add or find any reputable information regarding the `1980s counterparts. Dwanyewest (talk) 00:49, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
- [12] I don't know if any info can be gained from this. Dwanyewest (talk) 12:57, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
- You could mention those in the article on Abdu Shaher to help show he meets GNG. Papaursa (talk) 19:18, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
- [12] I don't know if any info can be gained from this. Dwanyewest (talk) 12:57, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
Its all gone wrong again
I tried to link fi:Luokka:Suomalaiset karatekat and en:Category:Finnish karateka together but as usual I messed up, can someone competent try before I accidently wreck havoc on Wikipedia. Dwanyewest (talk) 21:53, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
I think she deserves one thoughts!?!
I just finished watching a documentary called Timeshift - Everybody was Kung Fu Fighting: The Rise of Martial Arts in Britain. I was thinking I was surprised how nobody had thought to write about Sarah Mayer (judoka), the first non Japanese woman to receive a Judo belt does anyone agree or disagree she should get an article? Dwanyewest (talk) 02:23, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
- I would think you could find enough coverage on her to meet GNG. That seems like something that should be well documented.Mdtemp (talk) 19:46, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
I clicked on 12 of the links provided as references and couldn't access any of them. I want to see if it's my computer settings or if others have the same problem. I'm struggling to get through the puffery to find any supported claims of notability. Papaursa (talk) 02:38, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
I just tagged this article for questionable notability and a lack of independent reliable sources. I was going to put it up for deletion, but thought I'd get some other opinions first. Mdtemp (talk) 16:34, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
Origins of Taekwondo
Is this source legit for wikipedia [13].? Dwanyewest (talk) 10:40, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
- I have no idea if Shin Dong-A magazine is a reliable source. Certainly the claims look significant and I would want to see additional sources before I wrote something that controversial.Mdtemp (talk) 19:51, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
- As an initial pointer, the source publication named in that PDF file appears to be part of The Dong-a Ilbo. Janggeom (talk) 15:34, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
I don't know if this is true but there maybe some academic research by a man called Dr Steve Carpenter called Problems in the identity and Philosophy of Taegwondo and their Historical Causes published in 1995. Dwanyewest (talk) 13:57, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
"fighter"
We are discussing the term "(fighter)" as disambiguation at Ed Herman (mixed martial artist), does "fighter" only mean MMA fighter? Is it good disambiguation? -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 11:03, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
- Saying he is a mixed martial artist is much more precise and informative than saying he is a "fighter". I have posted my preference for the more precise term at the talk page's discussion. Papaursa (talk) 03:44, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Which is the correct spelling?
As I have been updating many of the European Karate Championships articles I found many of the fighters names have been spelt in correctly or placed in wrong category. I was wondering which is the correct spelling Guusje Van Mourik or Guus van Mourik? Dwanyewest (talk) 04:35, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
Did this guy ever win medals
I am trying to complete all the 70-90's competitors that were medallists in the European Karate Championships what is hampering my research is I copied most of the info from the French wikipedia page and many of names are misspelled or simply in correct some of sources of info only seem available in foreign Languages. Can anyone confirm that Håkan Nygren was ever a medallist in 1970s and help complete the rest please. Dwanyewest (talk) 05:07, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
Dear martial arts experts: The draft is up for review at AfC right now. Is this a notable fighter, and should the article be accepted? —Anne Delong (talk) 00:05, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
- I would not say he is notable. His only claim to fame is being promoted to black belt by a particular instructor. The user name of the primary editor strongly suggests COI.Peter Rehse (talk) 09:08, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
- I would agree that he does not appear to meet the guidelines for notability as a martial artist and that COI appears to be an issue. Papaursa (talk) 03:38, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks, Peter Rehse and Papaursa. It's been declined. —Anne Delong (talk) 23:17, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
- I would agree that he does not appear to meet the guidelines for notability as a martial artist and that COI appears to be an issue. Papaursa (talk) 03:38, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
"fighter"
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
I've proposed that "fighter" not be used as the disambiguator for MMA articles, and that "mixed martial artist" be used. For the RFC, see WT:BIOG -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 10:34, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
What about Choi Jung Hwa?
Does Choi Jung Hwa the son of Choi Hong Hi deserve an article an article I can find newspaper articles suggesting he went to jail in Canada was implicated in a plot to assassinate a South Korean president and is president of the ITF[14]. Dwanyewest (talk) 01:09, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
- I would expect that he would be similar in notability to Tran Trieu Quan, so probably yes. Janggeom (talk) 14:59, 21 December 2014 (UTC)